Turabay dynasty

The Turabay dynasty (

During the conquest of the Levant and Egypt by the Ottoman Empire in 1516–1517, the Turabay chief Qaraja and his son Turabay aided the forces of Ottoman Sultan Selim I. The Ottomans kept them in their Mamluk-era role as guardians of the strategic Via Maris and Damascus–Jerusalem highways and rewarded them with tax farms in northern Palestine. Their territory became a sanjak in 1559 and Turabay's son Ali became its first governor. His brother Assaf was appointed in 1573, serving for ten years before being dismissed and exiled to Rhodes for involvement in a rebellion. His nephew Turabay was appointed in 1589 and remained in office until his death in 1601. His son and successor Ahmad, the most prominent chief of the dynasty, ruled Lajjun for nearly a half-century and repulsed attempts by the powerful Druze chief and Ottoman governor of Sidon-Beirut and Safed, Fakhr al-Din Ma'n, to take over Lajjun and Nablus in the 1620s. In the effort, he consolidated the family's alliance with the Ridwan and Farrukh governing dynasties of Gaza and Nablus, which remained intact until the dynasties' demise toward the end of the century.

As multazims and sanjak-beys the Turabays were entrusted with collecting taxes for the Ottomans, quelling local rebellions, acting as judges, and securing roads. They were largely successful in these duties, while keeping good relations with the peasantry and the village chiefs of the sanjak. Although in the 17th century a number of their emirs lived in the towns of Lajjun and Jenin, the Turabays largely preserved their nomadic way of life, pitching camp with their Banu Haritha tribesmen near Caesarea in the winters and the plain of Acre in the summers. The eastward migration of the Banu Haritha to the Jordan Valley, Ottoman centralization drives, and diminishing tax revenues brought about their political decline and they were permanently stripped of office in 1677. Members of the family remained in Jenin at the close of the century, and descendants continue to live in present-day northern Israel and Palestine.

History

Origins

The Turabays were the preeminent house of the Banu Haritha tribe,

In 1516 the Ottoman sultan Selim I (r. 1512–1520) launched an invasation of the Mamluk empire. After the Ottomans routed the Mamluks at the Battle of Marj Dabiq, Qaraja made contact with Selim.^[10] Qaraja's son Turabay joined Selim's forces and participated in the subsequent conquest of Mamluk Egypt.^[11] On 8 February 1517, after his victory over the Mamluks, Selim wrote to Qaraja from Cairo, ordering him to capture Mamluk officials fleeing Egypt, transfer captive commanders to the sultan, and execute regular soldiers.^[10][12] On 2 February 1518, Qaraja paid homage to Selim in Damascus, where the sultan had stopped on his return to the imperial capital Constantinople.^[13]

The Ottomans' most significant challenge in governing the

There may have been tensions between Turabay and

Sinan Pasha al-Tuwashi, the beylerbey of Damascus in 1545–1548, and the latter's successors. In 1552 the Turabays were accused of rebellion for acquiring illegal firearms and the authorities warned the sanjak-beys (sanjak governors) of Damascus Eyalet to prohibit their subjects' dealings with the family. A nephew of Turabay was sent to Damascus to secure a pardon for the family. The information about this event is unclear,^[25] and the motivation for the rebellion unknown.^[26] The Sublime Porte (Ottoman imperial government) ordered the beylerbey of Damascus to lure and punish the family; Turabay may have been killed as a consequence.^[25]

Early governors of Lajjun

The Iqta of Turabay was transformed into a sanjak, called the Lajjun Sanjak after its center, Lajjun, in 1559.^[27] Turabay's son Ali was appointed its sanjak-bey,^[25] becoming the first member of the family to hold the office.^[28] Under his leadership, the Turabays once again entered into a state of rebellion by acquiring firearms and Ali was replaced by an imperial official, Kemal Bey, in 1564. Three years later the Porte ordered the arrest and imprisonment of a member of the family for stockpiling arms.^[25]

Ali was succeeded as head of the family by his brother Assaf, who worked to reconcile with the Ottomans by demonstrating his obedience to the Porte. He allied with the sanjak-bey of Gaza, Ridwan Pasha, who lobbied on his behalf to the Porte, writing that Assaf safeguarded the road between Cairo and Damascus. The Porte responded in 1571 that if he continued to be obedient he would be granted the sultan's favor.^[29] Two years later he was appointed sanjak-bey of Lajjun.^[30] In addition to Lajjun, in 1579, Assaf requested the governorship of Nablus, promising to pay the sanjak's tax arrears and build watchtowers to secure its roads from brigands.^[31][32] The Porte denied his request, wary of his growing strength in the region.^[32][33]

Assaf was dismissed in 1583. The information about his dismissal is inconsistent in the Ottoman government records.^[29] One version is that Arab tribes in northern Palestine were in a state of rebellion at the time and the authorities believed Assaf was involved in their revolt.^[29][32] Sharon posits that Assaf had become intolerably powerful to the Porte.^[33] At an unspecified point after his dismissal, he was exiled to Rhodes but was allowed to return in 1589.^[32][34][29] In an alternative version, he went into hiding and his son was exiled and the two were pardoned in 1589.^[34] In any case, Assaf was not reinstated as sanjak-bey.^[26]

During his absence, an impostor, referred to in Ottoman documents as "ʿAssāf the Liar", had gained control of the sanjak.^[29] He went to Damascus in an attempt to legalize his rule.^[35] Although the beylerbey of Damascus, Muhammad Pasha, sought to grant his request, the Porte ordered that Assaf the Liar be arrested and executed in October 1590.^[36] The Porte appointed a member of the Turabay family, the actual Assaf's nephew Turabay ibn Ali, as sanjak-bey.^[29] In March 1592, Assaf lodged a complaint against Turabay, accusing him of having seized from him 150,000 coins, 300 camels and 2,500 calves.^[36] In 1594 Turabay acted as a placeholder for the sanjak-bey of Gaza, Ahmad Pasha ibn Ridwan, and continued to govern Lajjun until his death in 1601.^[37] According to the historian Abdul-Rahim Abu-Husayn, Turabay demonstrated "a special capability" and the Ottomans had "confidence in his person".^[31] By the 17th century the Banu Haritha's dwelling areas spanned the coastal plain of Palestine around Qaqun to Kafr Kanna in the Lower Galilee and the surrounding hinterland.^[38]

Governorship of Ahmad

When Fakhr al-Din and his proxies were dismissed from the sanjaks of Safed, Ajlun and Nablus in 1623, Ahmad backed their replacements Bashir Qansuh in Ajlun and Muhammad ibn Farrukh in Nablus.^[44] Starting in the 16th century, the Turabays had developed a military, economic and marital alliance with the Farrukhs of Nablus and the Ridwans of Gaza.^[45][g] By the following century, the extensive ties between the three ruling families practically made them "one extended family", according to the historian Dror Ze'evi.^[45] Through these inter-dynastic alliances, the influence of the Turabays extended across Palestine and Transjordan.^[47] Fakhr al-Din responded to the Turabays' support for his replacements by dispatching troops to capture the tower of Haifa and burn villages in Mount Carmel, places in Ahmad's jurisdiction, which were hosting Shia refugees from Safed Sanjak. At the head of an army of sekban mercenaries,^[h] Fakhr al-Din captured Jenin, which he garrisoned, and proceeded to resend Mustafa to Nablus. The two sides met in battle at the Awja River, where Ahmad and his local allies decisively defeated Fakhr al-Din and forced his retreat.^[44] The Porte expressed its gratitude to Ahmad and his allies by enlarging his land holdings.^[50]

Fakhr al-Din soon after had to contend with a campaign by Mustafa Pasha, the beylerbey of Damascus, allowing Ahmad to clear Lajjun Sanjak of the residual Ma'nid presence.^[44] To that end, his brother Ali recaptured the tower of Haifa, killed the commander of the Ma'nid sekbans there, and raided the plain around Acre.^[44][39] Fakhr al-Din defeated and captured Mustafa Pasha in the Battle of Anjar later that year and extracted from the beylerbey the appointment of his son Mansur as sanjak-bey of Lajjun. Nonetheless, the Ma'nids could not gain control there, even after recapturing the tower of Haifa in May/June 1624. Ahmad sued for peace with Fakhr al-Din, but the latter offered him deputy control of the sanjak and conditioned it on Ahmad's submission to Fakhr al-Din in person; Ahmad ignored the offer.^[44] Later that month Ahmad and his ally Muhammad ibn Farrukh defeated Fakhr al-Din in battle and shortly after dislodged the Ma'nid sekbans stationed in Jenin.^[51] At the end of June, Ahmad took up residence in the town. He then sent his Bedouin troops to raid the plain of Acre.^[52]

Afterward, Ahmad and Fakhr al-Din reached an agreement stipulating the withdrawal of Ma'nid troops from the tower of Haifa, an end to Bedouin raids against Safed Sanjak, and the establishment of peaceful relations; afterward "communication between bilad [the lands of Banu] Haritha and bilad Safad was resumed", according to the contemporary local historian

Ahmad was dismissed as sanjak-bey in May 1640 for his role in a rebellion, but reappointed in the same year.[50] He remained in office until his death in 1647.^[52] At different times during his governorship, his brothers Ali, Azzam and Muhammad and son Zayn Bey held iltizam, timars, and ziamets (the latter two being forms of imperial land grants) of the Lajjun Sanjak in general or its subdistricts of Atlit, Shara and Shafa.^[55]

Later chiefs and downfall

Ahmad's son Zayn succeeded him as sanjak-bey and held office until his death in 1660.

Throughout the late 17th century the Porte, having eliminated the power of Fakhr al-Din,[59] who "had reduced Ottoman authority in Syria to a mere shadow" in the words of Abu-Husayn,^[60] embarked on a centralization drive in the western sanjaks of Damascus Eyalet to suppress the power of local chiefs.^[i] The Porte had become increasingly concerned with the local dynasties due to diminishing tax revenues from their sanjaks and the loss of control of the Hajj caravan routes. The Turabays, Ridwans and Farrukhs considered Palestine their collective fiefdom and resisted imperial attempts to weaken their control, while being careful not to openly rebel against the Porte.^[61] High-ranking officers, sanjak-beys from outside Syria, and family members of the imperial elite were gradually appointed to the sanjaks of Damascus Eyalet. This proved challenging in the case of the Turabays in Lajjun; their chiefs were occasionally replaced but by dint of their dominance of the sanjak would quickly regain office.^[59] With the imprisonment and execution of the Ridwan governor of Gaza, Husayn Pasha, in 1662/63, and the mysterious death of the sanjak-bey of Nablus, Assaf Farrukh, on his way to Constantinople in 1670/71, the alliance of the three dynasties was fatally weakened.^[62]

The Turabays' position declined further with Muhammad's death.^[53] His nephews succeeded him as sanjak-bey for relatively short stints:^[63] Salih Bey, the son of Zayn, ruled until he was succeeded by his cousin Yusuf Bey, the son of Ali.^[64] Yusuf was dismissed from the post in 1677 and replaced by an Ottoman officer, Ahmed Pasha al-Tarazi,^[64][53] who was also appointed to other sanjaks in Palestine;^[65] "the [Ottoman] government had abandoned them", in al-Muhibbi's words.^[50] The Turabays' governorship of Lajjun thus ended and the family "ceased to be a ruling power", according to Bakhit.^[63] Sharon attributes the decline of the Turabays to the eastward migration of their power base, the Banu Haritha, to the Jordan Valley and the Ajlun region in the late 17th century.^[53] The Turabays were politically replaced in northern Palestine by the semi-Bedouin Banu Zaydan of Zahir al-Umar.^[66]

Sharon notes that "the memory of the Turabays was completely erased with their fall".

In their capacity as multazims the Turabays were responsible for collecting taxes in their jurisdiction on behalf of the Porte.[31] They designated a sheikh (chief) in each village in the sanjak to collect the taxes from the peasants. The village sheikhs paid the Turabay emirs based on the harvest.^[57][69] In return, the lives and properties of the village chiefs were defended by the Turabays.^[69] In the words of Sharon, the Turabays "developed good and effective relations with the sedentary population".^[70] The annual revenues forwarded to the emir in the late 17th century amounted to about 100,000 piasters (equivalent to 1,200,000 akçes), a relatively small amount.^[57]

The Turabays levied customs on the European ships which occasionally docked in the harbors of Haifa and Tantura.^[31][69] Both ports were also used by the Turabays for their own imports, including coffee, vegetables, rice and cloth.^[57] The revenues derived from Haifa ranged from 1,000 akçes in 1538 to 10,000 akçes in 1596,^[71] while the combined revenues of Tantura, Tirat al-Luz (on Mount Carmel) and Atlit were 5,000 akçes in 1538.^[72] The early Turabay governors did not invest in securing or building Haifa, which became a haven for Maltese pirates. Due to attacks by both the pirates and the Turabay governors and the conflict between the Turabays and Fakhr al-Din, European merchants avoided trading in Haifa. To attract French merchants to the port, in 1631, Ahmad Turabay began to rebuild and resettle Haifa and permitted the Carmelites to construct houses there.^[73]

The Turabays were responsible for ensuring the safety of the sanjak's roads for traveling merchants and the imperial post, and suppressing local rebellions.

The Turabays retained their Bedouin way of life, living in tents among their Banu Haritha tribesmen. In the summers they encamped along the Na'aman River near Acre and in the winters they encamped near Caesarea.^[33] D'Arvieux noted that their chiefs could have resided in palaces, but chose not to; they remained nomadic out of pride.^[33] Although they retained their nomadic tents, by the 17th century they also established residences in the towns of Lajjun and Jenin.^[78] According to Sharon, the Turabays "introduced two innovations" to their traditional way of life "as a mark of their official status": the employment of a secretary to handle their correspondences and the use of a military band (composed of tambourines, oboes, drums and trumpets).^[33] The family, and the Banu Haritha in general, were mainly dependent on livestock for their source of living. Their main assets were their horses, camels, cattle, goats, sheep and grain.^[31]

The family designated Jenin as the administrative headquarters of the sanjak and buried their dead in the town's Izz al-Din cemetery.^[28] Turabay ibn Ali was the first emir of the family to be buried in a mausoleum, later known as Qubbat al-Amir Turabay (Dome of Amir Turabay). The building was the only grave of the Turabays to have survived into the 20th century and no longer exists today.^[28] It was described by a British Mandatory antiquities inspector in 1941 as a ruined domed chamber housing the tombstone of the emir with a two-line inscription reading:

Basmalah [in the name of God]. This is the tomb of the slave who is in need of his Lord, the Exalted, al-Amir Turabay b. Ali. The year 1010 AH, i.e. 1601 CE].^[28]

Assessment

The Turabay emirs oversaw nearly a century of relative peace and stability in northern Palestine.^[69] According to Abu-Husayn, they maintained the favor of the Ottomans by "properly attending to the administrative and guard duties assigned to them" and served as an "example of a dynasty of Bedouin chiefs who managed to perpetuate their control over a given region".^[57] They stood in contrast to their Bedouin contemporaries, the Furaykhs of the Beqaa Valley, who used initial imperial favor to enrich themselves at the expense of the proper governance of their territory.^[57] As a result of their administrative success, military strength, and loyalty to the Porte, the Turabays were one of the few local dynasties to maintain their rule throughout the 16th and 17th centuries.^[60] The historian William Harris notes that the Turabay emirs, along with Fakhr al-Din and the chiefs of other local governing dynasties were part of a group of late 16th–early 17th-century Levantine "super chiefs ... serviceable for the Ottoman pursuit of 'divide and rule' ... They could war among themselves and even with the governor of Damascus ... but were in deep trouble if the Ottomans became agitated about revenue or loyalty".^[79]

Notes